Talk:Queen of Hearts

LotsoBearLover - Welcome to sunnyside! TALK - You've got a playdate with destiny!" WHERE IS THE KING OF HEARTS?!?

}

I DON'T KNOW, DON'T GET YOUR PANTIES BUNCHED UP NOW—Urutapu 07:43, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Flashpenny - You'll wear the face of despair. TALK - Where's the fun in this? I think he was in the movie as the sychophnatic short-in-stature husband but here I dunno... Maybe they had a divorce, Queen of Hearts style.

LotsoBearLover - Welcome to sunnyside! TALK - You've got a playdate with destiny!" *shudders* does that mean she cut off his head? *shudders again*

Flashpenny - You'll wear the face of despair. TALK - Where's the fun in this? That's supposed to be the (depraved, I know) pun, yes.

File:DiZ2-ChofMem.png

Gnut2.0 - It is the fate of a Nobody TALK - An entity shrouded in mystery. The husband was in the book and an older version of the Alice movie (named after the book). In the game, I don't know, they might have thought that he was too small a part to care. I mean, tell me a part in the game that was really useless and then I will give my plan be explanation.

The Queen's Evidence

Organization 13 - I'd rather we just skip the formalities. TALK - How I love a game! What exactly is the Queen's evidence?

She thought Alice was guilty. She is the queen of hearts. She never has any evidence it was Alice ("Why do I think it was her? BECAUSE I SAID SO THAT'S WHY!")(Bananaphone1996 21:11, May 8, 2010 (UTC))

Neutral?

Why does it say the Queen of Hearts is only neutral. She seemed pretty antagonistic to me. Was she not the villain of this world. One who cuts off another's head for no reason sounds evil to me. Mind if I change it to antagonist?(Bananaphone1996 21:10, May 8, 2010 (UTC))

HeartlessSlayer - You see, I want to help them because...because...well, they need us. TALK - *&&X% Mostly because she never used the Heartless at all. Plus in the original stories, she was never really a villain, just more of an antagonising obstacle. Her character is more of blind rage, where she's quick to execute regardless of reason. And if you've visited the world again when more heartless appear, you'll actually find out that her card soldiers are FIGHTING the heartless. So while antagonistic, she's not actually a villain.

So what??!! Just because she doesn't use the heartless, that doesn't automatically means she isn't an antagonist.--65.247.196.50 22:59, December 1, 2010 (UTC)

Maybe true, but please dont raise your "voice". What make her "neutral" is the fact that she doesn´t keep on going after Sora, but does not help him either, just "protect" his world from the heartless. That´s pretty neutral to me.--"Behold the endless Abyss!" -- Dark-EnigmaXIII 22:20, December 3, 2010 (UTC)

Well that's true. After all, she is only defending herself and her world. I guess she can be neutral. Sorry for the yelling :)--65.126.114.121 02:11, December 4, 2010 (UTC)

Personally I'd consider her an antagonist, though. If you remember her during the trial, she was hellbent on, well, a lack of justice. I'd call that pretty antagonistic behavior. Soxxeh 02:15, December 4, 2010 (UTC)